IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/spr/sprchp/978-0-387-30399-4_7.html

Incentive Problems and Investment Timing Options

In: Essays in Accounting Theory in Honour of Joel S. Demski

Author

Listed:
  • Rick Antle

    (Yale School of Management)

  • Peter Bogetoft

    (The Royal Agricultural University)

  • Andrew W. Stark

    (Manchester Business School)

Abstract

We characterize optimal investment and compensation strategies in a model of an investment opportunity with managerial incentive problems, caused by asymmetric information over investment costs and the manager’s desire to consume slack, and flexibility over the timing of its acceptance. The flexibility over timing consists of the opportunity to invest immediately, delay investment for one period, or not invest at all. The timing option provides an opportunity to invest when circumstances are most favorable. However, the timing option also gives the manager an incentive to influence the timing of the investment to circumstances in which he gets more slack. Under the assumption that investment costs are distributed independently over time, the optimal investment policy consists of a sequence of target costs, below which investment takes place and above which it does not. The timing option reduces optimal cost targets, relative to the case when no timing option is present. The first cost target is lowered because the compensation function calls for the payment of an amount equal to the manager’s option to generate future slack, should investment take place. This increases the cost of investing at the first opportunity, thus reducing its attractiveness. In order to ease the incentive problem at the initial investment opportunity, the second target cost is also lowered, even though no further timing options remain. Making the additional assumption that costs are uniformly distributed, we generate additional insights. First, circumstances are identified in which not only does the cost target for immediate investment exceed that for delayed investment but also the probability of immediate investment exceeds the conditional probability of delayed investment, results impossible in the first-best context. Here, relatively speaking, incentive problems shift the probability of investment away from delayed investment towards immediate investment. Second, incentive problems are generally thought to reduce target costs, relative to opportunities with no incentive problems, in order to limit the manager’s slack on lower cost projects. Incentive problems, however, have more complex effects in the opportunity analyzed here. As a result, we are able to identify circumstances under which the target cost for immediate investment may be increased by incentive effects, relative to the target cost that exists in the absence of incentive problems.

Suggested Citation

  • Rick Antle & Peter Bogetoft & Andrew W. Stark, 2007. "Incentive Problems and Investment Timing Options," Springer Books, in: Rick Antle & Frøystein Gjesdal & Pierre Jinghong Liang (ed.), Essays in Accounting Theory in Honour of Joel S. Demski, chapter 0, pages 145-168, Springer.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-0-387-30399-4_7
    DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-30399-4_7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a
    for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barbara Harreiter & Thomas Pfeiffer & Georg Schneider, 2007. "Are real options more valuable in the presence of agency conflicts?," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 185-207, November.
    2. Antle, Rick & Bogetoft, Peter & Stark, Andrew W., 2001. "Information systems, incentives and the timing of investments," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4-5), pages 267-294.
    3. Wonder, Nicholas, 2006. "Contracting on real option payoffs," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 20-35.
    4. David Martimort & Stéphane Straub, 2016. "How To Design Infrastructure Contracts In A Warming World: A Critical Appraisal Of Public–Private Partnerships," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57(1), pages 61-88, February.
    5. Madhav V. Rajan & Stefan Reichelstein, 2004. "ANNIVERSARY ARTICLE: A Perspective on ÜAsymmetric Information, Incentives and Intrafirm Resource AllocationÝ," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1615-1623, December.
    6. Clemens Löffler & Thomas Pfeiffer & Georg Schneider, 2013. "The irreversibility effect and agency conflicts," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 219-239, February.
    7. Nicole Bastian Johnson & Thomas Pfeiffer & Georg Schneider, 2013. "Multistage Capital Budgeting for Shared Investments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(5), pages 1213-1228, May.
    8. Nicole Bastian Johnson & Thomas Pfeiffer & Georg Schneider, 2017. "Two-stage capital budgeting, capital charge rates, and resource constraints," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 933-963, June.
    9. Löffler, Clemens & Pfeiffer, Thomas & Schneider, Georg, 2012. "Controlling for supplier switching in the presence of real options and asymmetric information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 223(3), pages 690-700.
    10. Thomas Pfeiffer & Georg Schneider, 2007. "Residual Income-Based Compensation Plans for Controlling Investment Decisions Under Sequential Private Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(3), pages 495-507, March.
    11. David Martimort & Stéphane Straub, 2016. "How To Design Infrastructure Contracts In A Warming World: A Critical Appraisal Of Public–Private Partnerships," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 57, pages 61-88, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:sprchp:978-0-387-30399-4_7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.